Durham Dispatch

UE150 DHHS Council leaders met with DHHS Secretary Devdutta Sangvai on January 15, 2026 in Raleigh. (Pictured Left to Right) Rakesh Patel (CRH), Sekia Royall (O'Berry), Peggy Briggins (Caswell), Sec. Devutta Sangvai, Christine Jiggetts (Murdoch), William Young (Cherry Hospital), Lora Tate (VE staff) UE150 DHHS Council leaders participated in two actions the second week of January 2026 to demand use of the $386 Million DHHS lapsed salary fund. This included demands around an immediate $3,000 bonus, 10% temporary bonus, creation of a Safe Staffing Task Force and advocacy for raising the minimum wage to $25 per hour. On January 13, 2026, UE150 DHHS Council leaders attended the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee meeting for DHHS. This committee includes elected House and Senate members who oversee DHHS. Before the meeting, UE150 members hosted a press conference in front of the Legislative building. During the committee meeting, union members delivered over 650 petition signatures to high-ranking officials. William Young, UE150 President at Cherry Hospital told the press: "We are here today because hundreds of healthcare workers are upset that we have not received a raise this year, and yet DHHS is sitting on $386 million worth of lapsed salary funds. This is not acceptable. We need a raise! Everything is going up. Our insurance has gone up." UE150 DHHS Council Leaders Meet With DHHS Sec. Sangvai and DSOHF Leadership On January 15, UE150 DHHS Council leaders also met with DHHS Secretary Devutta Sangvai, along with DSOHF Director Nikki Ashmont, Karen Burkes, and other DHHS officials. In addition to delivering our petitions, this was a high-level meeting where UE150 put forth the following proposals: Communication strategy A. Quarterly meeting between UE 150 leadership and DSOHF Director. B. Yearly site visits by DHHS leadership where they will hold meetings with frontline workers without the presence of supervisors. C. Help UE 150 with facilitating meet and confers with CEOs. D. Authorize access to new employee orientation in addition to monthly access for union meetings. Raises - Audit revealed significant money in the lapsed salary fund A. Presented petitions demanding an immediate $3000 bonus to all active employees without exceptions. B. 10% temporary pay raise to high vacancy positions. C. Paychecks every 2 weeks instead of monthly. D. Advocate to the legislature for a $25 minimum wage and 20% salary increase for all employees. E. Institute a 7-year Step Pay Plan. Safety issues A. Recognition that patient characteristics are changing. B. Improved training for new hires and annual trainings. C. Enhance safety protocols given the high rate of ITP patients. D. More visible law enforcement presence. E. Metal detectors at visitor entrances. F. Separation of patient with forensics charges from IVC patients. G. Instituting a zero-tolerance policy for physical violence perpetrated upon health care workers. H. DSOHF create a Safe Staffing Task Force. Workplace culture A. Recognition that significant improvements are needed to create and sustain healthier workplaces with true safety cultures. We need workplaces without bullying or retaliation. B. Create a yearly feedback system where workers can anonymously evaluate their supervisor. C. Stay Interviews (This will provide valuable feedback) D. A grievance procedure for reporting incidents of supervisor bullying. E. Institute a more effective method than HR (ombudsman) to investigate repetitive violations of hospital policy by supervisors. Well-known bullies should not be allowed to thrive. Secretary Sangvai listened intently to these proposals. He was especially interested in creating a workplace with zero tolerance for workplace bullying and in pursuing the creation of a Safe Staffing Task Force. Workers must stay active in their workplaces and in the union so we can achieve these needed changes! Sekia Royall delivers petition signatures to DHHS. Sec. Sangvai and Nikki Ashmont, DSOHF Director on Jan 15. DHHS Workers Speak out for Safe Staffing, and a Real Raise The following are quotes from DHHS UE150 union worker leaders during the January 15, 2026 meeting with DHHS Secretary Sangvai and DSOHF Director Ashmont. Peggy Briggins, Caswell Center, UE150 DHHS Council Chair "We represent the most vulnerable individuals. I have been there 28 years. We used to receive merit bonuses. Now everything is changing. We need a $3,000 bonus with no strings attached. For someone to have a written warning and be knocked out of bonuses, even though they have given 15-20 years, that is not fair. We need a raise to $25 per hour minimum and 20% for all DHHS workers. There is no reason a state employee should work a second job. We are losing people to private facilities and factories because they are paid better than us." Rakesh Patel, Central Regional Hospital, UE150 Chapter President "70% of our patients are coming in from jail. There forensics patients are placed on the same units as our community mental health patients. This creates safety issues for both patients and staff. UE 150 has always strived for Safety, Fairness, and Excellence, providing the best care possible. We are worried about the census at the hospital. There are not enough staff CNA's or RN's. We have shared our concerns with the legislature. Some of them are not as committed to the DHHS mission as we are. DHHS continues to spend a ton of money to pay temporary staff (2-3 times the salary paid to permanent staff). This is not a good business model. 60% of RN's at CRH are agency. It is really hard to run a hospital with all that chaos and lack of training. We are hoping to work with you all to establish a Safe Staffing Task Force." William Young, Cherry Hospital, UE150 Local Vice President "We are requesting quarterly meetings between UE 150 leadership and DSOHF Director. We also need help with facilitating UE150 meet and confers with CEOs. Cherry Hospital is currently denying our requests, violating DHHS policy. We would also like you to authorize access to the new employee orientations in addition to monthly access for union meetings." Sekia Royall, O'Berry Center "Workers are frustrated. We keep getting the end of the stick. We do not have a state budget, and state workers have not received any raise this year. That is why we can't keep people. We collected over 600 signatures from DHHS workers across the state on our petition demanding the use of the $386 million in lapsed salary fund to pay us now!" UE150 and Community Win! State Divests Pension from Israeli Bonds Members of UE Local 150 joined a coalition of unions and organizations throughout North Carolina at the end of last year to demand the state divest state workers' and teachers' pensions from Israeli bonds. After holding rallies and speaking out at meetings at the state treasurer's office, the coalition succeeded in pressuring the state to sell $6.7 million in Israeli government bonds held in the state pension fund. Over 40 unions, community organizations, and faith groups across the state supported the efforts of the coalition. On October 29, workers held a rally at North Carolina Treasurer Brad Briner's office. They then delivered a petition signed by over 5,000 people alongside 37 organizations and unions demanding he divest state workers' pensions from Israeli bonds because, as the petition stated, "The people of North Carolina do not want a retirement fund invested in genocide, occupation, and apartheid." The petition also cites the declining economy of Israel as an additional reason to divest. At the October rally, Local 150 member and NC State graduate worker Katie Boatner explained the returns on the pension investments in Israel were extremely low, lower than a high-yield savings account. Reflecting on the event, Broatner said, "Some of the key points of my speech were that state pension holders themselves expressed a desire for their pension funds to serve the dignity of people. They are not doing that." Sekia Royall, a member of Local 150 and state worker for the Department of Health and Human Services in Goldsboro, NC, attended both the late October rally and a committee oversight meeting on November 19, where she spoke to the state investment board about the need for divestment. She explained during her public comment that the workers of North Carolina did not want their pensions to be financially tied to the violence Israel is committing on Palestinians. During the committee oversight meeting, State Treasurer Brad Briner recognized Local 150 members from other actions organized throughout 2025 where they pressured legislators to protect their state health plan. Two days after Royall spoke at the meeting, the state treasurer announced $6.7 million had been divested from Israeli bonds. Reflecting on the successful campaign, Royall said, "We wanted to make it clear that we did not support what Israel is doing to the Palestinian people. Our bonds weren't even making us money due to the bad economy." Boatner said, "North Carolina has a history of activism in the South and it is important that we keep pressure on our leaders. Without community, large community coalition involvement, I do not think the success would have been as resounding." When asked about her thoughts on the divestment, Royall said, 'This is a coalition that is standing up against oppression anywhere and everywhere, in Israel and throughout the world. And we won!" This article was first published by UE Local 150 .

According to FEC filings, the Jobs and Democracy PAC reported around $1,600,000 in spending on behalf of Rep. Valerie Foushee as of Feb. 26, 2026. The funds are being used to buy TV ads in the North Carolina Fourth District Congressional race, where Foushee is being challenged by Durham County Commissioner Nida Allam in the Democratic primary [ 1 ]. Anthropic   recently announced a donation of $20 million to a nonprofit called Public First Action that was established in Nov. 2025. That 501(c)(4) organization it turn runs Super PACs called the Jobs and Democracy PAC , aimed at Democrats, and Defending Our Values PAC, aimed at Republicans [ 2 ][ 3 ] [ 4 ]. Foushee is a co -chair of a new House Democratic Commission on AI and the Innovation Economy. Another member of the committee, Rep. Josh Gottheimer, has also received support from the Anthropic- backed Jobs and Democracy PAC. In Apex, on the southeast edge of the Fourth District, opposition has been growing to the construction of a new data center. Around 250 residents recently signed a letter asking Allam and Foushee to oppose the project [ 5 ]. Allam agreed to the request, while Foushee took a neutral position (she personally opposes the project but said that she defers to the decision of local officials). Foushee often takes campaign contributions from industries she is tasked with regulating. She serves on Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Mater ials, but has received contributions from three railroad companies (BNSF, CSX, and Norfolk Southern). Foushee sits on the   Subcommittee on Energy and has accepted donations from Entergy, a fossil fuel company. She serves on the Subcommittee on Aviation and the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics but has taken contributions from airlines (Delta Air Lines), space (Blue Origin), and weapons companies (Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, General Dynamics, and more) [ 6 ]. Allam has refused corporate PAC money. Her candidacy has garnered support from Sen. Bernie Sanders, Justice Democrats, Working Families Party, and others. Foushee is endorsed by Gov. Josh Stein, former Gov. Roy Cooper, and most major figures within the North Carolina Democratic Party establishment. The Fourth District primary is a rematch of a 2022 race between Allam and Foushee, which became the most expensive primary in state history. In 2022, Foushee benefitted from around $4 million in outside expenditures by pro-Israel groups like AIPAC and pro-crypto organizations like Protect Our Future PAC. Work Cited "Jobs and Democracy PAC"  Federal Election Commission , 26 Feb. 2026, https://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/C00928374/1950503/se . "Anthropic is Donating $20 Million to Public First Action."  Anthropic , 12 Feb. 2026,  https://www.anthropic.com/news/donate-public-first-action . "Chris Stewart, Brad Carson Announce New Organization and Bipartisan Super PACs to Support AI Safeguards."  Public First Action , 25 Nov. 2025,  https://publicfirstaction.us/news/chris-stewart-brad-carson-announce-new-organization-and-bipartisan-super-pacs-to-support-ai-safeguards . "Foushee for Congress"  Federal Election Commission , 2025-26,  https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/?committee_id=C00794727&two_year_transaction_period=2026&data_type=processed . " Signed Open Letter on AI Data Centers to NC-04 Congressional Candidates", Apex Residents, https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/e/2PACX-1vT04t8dopMLqhK7qfCR__W17nRQXabKU5GuB2QcxVFHXm9jXByZp6eGI-G1JiPjkiqgoqvzd-v_jYGI/pub "The Corporate Money Taking Over 2026."  Punchbowl News , 19 Feb. 2026,  https://punchbowl.news/article/washington/pac-2026/ .

Rep. Valerie Foushee has long been criticized for her campaign finance practices. During the 2022 Democratic primary against Nida Allam, Foushee significantly outspent her opponent due to almost $4 million in outside expenditures by pro-Israel and and pro-crypto PACs. Since 2023, Israel’s public image has been tarnished by the genocide of the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip. In August 2025, Foushee announced she would not accept AIPAC support during her reelection campaign. Foushee has continued to accept donations from a wide range of corporations. In the third quarter of 2025, according to FEC filings, she took contributions from t echnology, weapons, pharmaceutical and fossil fuel corporations  [ x ]. Since 2024, Foushee has taken $21,000 in donations from weapons manufacturers [ x ]. The donation totals break down as such: 3M: $1,000 RTX (Raytheon): $1,000 General Dynamics: $1,000 Caterpillar Inc: $2,500 Garmin International: $2,500 Northrop Grumman: $3,000 Lockheed Martin: $3,000 Honeywell: $7,000 With the exception of Garmin, all of Foushee’s weapons donors appear on the American Friends Service Committee list of “Companies Profiting from the Gaza Genocide” [ x ]. In June 2024, United Nations experts reiterated their call for states and companies to stop arms sales to Israel [ x ]. Lockheed Martin provides the Israeli military with F-16 and F-35 fighter jets, along with a number of missile systems, including the Hellfire Missile. Northrop Grumman supplies Israel with M197 cannons. Caterpillar sells the D9 Armored Bulldozer, used to demolish homes in Gaza and the West Bank. Honeywell has supplied Inertial Measurement Units (IMU) for Boeing weapons such as Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM)  kits and GBU-39 Small Diameter Bombs. GBU-39s have been dubbed the Israeli military's “weapon of choice” in Gaza [ x ]. In June 2024, a Honeywell IMU was used in an Israeli airstrike that killed 40 people who were sheltering in a UN school [ x ]. Donations from weapons companies to Foushee could be linked to her House committees. In Feb. 6, 2025, she was appointed to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, serving as the Ranking Member of the Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee. In this position, Foushee helps to oversee NASA, the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and the White House Office of Science and Technology (OSTP) [ X ]. On Feb. 26, 2025, the Science, Space, and Technology Committee held a hearing to discuss NASA’s Artemis Program, where Foushee gave a statement in support of the Artemis and other similar NASA programs [ x ]. Lockheed Martin builds the Orion spacecraft, which is the spacecraft used in the Artemis Program [ x ]. In the past year alone, NASA has awarded weapons manufacturers the following in federal funding: Lockheed Martin: $1.25 billion [ x ] Northrop Grumman: $1.23 billion [ x ] Honeywell: $4.11 million [ x ] RTX: $340,000 [ x ]  Weapons donors have not contributed money to Foushee’s primary challenger, Durham County Commissioner Nida Allam, who has rejected corporate PAC funding.

Image credit: WUNC In 2025, the Durham City Council and Planning Commission voted on 34 development cases. Of those, 29 were approved, five denied, and one withdrawn. Before members changed in December 2025, the council approved 90% of items it voted on, while the commission approved 80%. Durham Dispatch has analyzed how council and commission voted on this year’s annexation and rezoning cases. That data is available here . This  2025 tracker emulates a 2024 project from Bull City Public Investigators  [ 1 ]. In 2024, the council voted on 45 development cases and approved all but three. The Planning Commission recommended approval in 76% of cases, compared to the council's 93% approval rate. The two-faction dynamic was also present in 2024. Caballero, Middleton, Rist, and Williams voted similarly 95% of the time when all four were present, while Baker, Cook, and Freeman were more likely to dissent. The council overrode a negative commission recommendation three times. For the Pickett Apartments case, the commission rejected it 2-8, yet the council approved it 4-3. Durham Gateway at Brier Creek was similar. Despite a 1-8 commission rejection, the council approved 4-2. Heartland Park Subdivision followed the same pattern, with a 4-7 commission denial reversed by a 4-3 council vote. In these three cases, a minority of Baker, Cook, and Freeman voted with the commission. The majority of Caballero, Middleton, Rist, and Williams voted to approve regardless. Annexation and rezoning votes in 2025 created two factions on Durham City Council. Baker, Cook, and Freeman formed a more skeptical bloc. Caballero, Middleton, Rist, and Williams voted together as a more permissive majority. This division shows up on the three overrides of commission recommendations, but also on Howard Property (4-3), Danube Lane Townhouses (6-1, with Baker dissenting) and Wake Olive (5-2, with Baker and Freeman dissenting). Middleton was the most reliable yes vote at 97%, while Baker was the most frequent no at 70%. The majority bloc (Caballero, Middleton, Rist, Williams) had an average approval rate of about 90%, compared to about 75% for the minority bloc (Baker, Cook, Freeman). Only four items in 2025 were decided with the new council (Matt Kopac and Shanetta Burris replacing Freeman and Middleton). However, all seven members voted the same on every item and the sample size too small to draw conclusions. For years, one of the most divisive topics in Durham politics has been how to address a chronic crisis of high rents and home prices. One answer has been to build outward, approving new developments on cheap land at the city's edge. Critics say this approach helps private developers more than cities themselves, since fringe development needs roads, water lines, and schools that cost more than the tax revenue they produce, leaving cities to foot the bill for decades. Fringe developments are also built around car ownership, making it harder to create walkable and bikeable communities [ 2 ]. In addition, annexations and rezonings aimed at spurring new construction could only help in a crisis that was simply a matter of supply. However, the core problem is that the US political system is committed to high rents and home values, and has been on a bipartisan basis for decades [ 3 ]. For example, federal laws such as the Faircloth Amendment cap public housing construction, while North Carolina laws bar municipalities from competing with private developers, through the Umstead Act, and prohibit rent control, through NC GS 42-14.1. Works Cited 1. Marohn, Charles. "America Should Sprawl? Not If We Want Strong Towns." Strong Towns, May 5, 2025.  https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2025-05-05-america-should-sprawl-not-if-we-want-strong-towns 2.  Marohn, Charles. “The Housing Debate Is Finally Catching Up to Reality.” Strong Towns, February 9, 2026. https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2026-2-9-the-housing-debate-is-finally-catching-up-to-reality 3. Constantine, Lucia. "How Durham City Council Voted on Development in 2024." Bull City Public Investigators, December 17, 2024.  https://bcpi.substack.com/p/how-durham-city-council-voted-on How Durham City Council and Planning Commission Voted on Development Cases in 2025 ( Complete Data ) Type Name City Council Vote City Council Date Planning Commission Vote Planning Commission Date Zoning Map Change 3112 South Alston Avenue 7 to 0 1/21/25 10 to 1 11/12/24 Zoning Map Change Brickworks 7 to 0 1/21/25 9 to 1 11/12/24 Zoning Map Change Davis Park West 7 to 0 1/21/25 10 to 1 11/12/24 Consolidated Annexation 2613 Carpenter Road 5 to 0 2/3/25 9 to 1 11/12/24 Consolidated Annexation Moriah Ridge 0 to 5 2/3/25 2 to 6 12/10/24 Consolidated Annexation Polanco Residence 7 to 0 2/17/25 8 to 0 12/10/24 Zoning Map Change Hoover Road Assemblage 7 to 0 2/17/25 8 to 0 12/10/24 Zoning Map Change Chin Page Road Apartments 7 to 0 3/17/25 8 to 0 1/14/25 Zoning Map Change Pickett Apartments 4 to 3 3/17/25 2 to 8 11/12/24 Consolidated Annexation 1012 Valmet Drive 7 to 0 3/17/25 8 to 0 1/14/25 Consolidated Annexation Sheffield Farms 2 to 5 4/7/25 1 to 7 1/14/25 Consolidated Annexation Romero Residence 7 to 0 4/21/25 8 to 0 2/11/25 Consolidated Annexation Page Corners 7 to 0 4/21/25 7 to 2 3/11/25 Zoning Map Change 1202 Ellis Road 7 to 0 4/21/25 8 to 0 2/11/25 Consolidated Annexation Howard Property 4 to 3 5/5/25 7 to 1 2/11/25 Zoning Map Change Strauss Drive Townhouses 7 to 0 5/5/25 8 to 0 2/11/25 Consolidated Annexation Danube Lane Townhouses 6 to 1 5/19/25 9 to 0 3/11/25 Consolidated Annexation Brier Creek Multifamily 7 to 0 5/19/25 6 to 3 3/11/25 Zoning Map Change Methodist Street Townhouses 6 to 1 6/16/25 10 to 0 4/8/25 Zoning Map Change 1606 and 1608 East Cornwallis Road 7 to 0 6/16/25 10 to 0 4/8/25 Zoning Map Change Durham Rescue Mission East Main Street 1 to 6 8/4/25 1 to 9 4/8/25 Zoning Map Change Fayetteville Flats 6 to 0 8/18/25 9 to 0 6/10/25 Zoning Map Change 4218 South Alston Avenue 6 to 0 8/18/25 12 to 0 5/13/25 Zoning Map Change 303 US 70 Warehouse 6 to 0 8/18/25 12 to 0 5/13/25 Consolidated Annexation Courtyards at Oak Grove 6 to 0 9/2/25 7 to 2 6/10/25 Consolidated Annexation Durham Gateway at Brier Creek 4 to 2 9/2/25 1 to 8 6/10/25 Consolidated Annexation Heartland Park Subdivision 4 to 3 10/6/25 4 to 7 8/12/25 Consolidated Zoning Map Change Ravenstone Commercial 7 to 0 10/20/25 11 to 0 8/12/25 Consolidated Annexation Wake Olive 5 to 2 10/20/25 7 to 4 8/12/25 Consolidated Zoning Map Change 1607 East Cornwallis Road 7 to 0 10/20/25 11 to 0 8/12/25 Zoning Map Change East Geer Towns 7 to 0 12/1/25 10 to 1 9/9/25 Consolidated Annexation 3306 Page Road 7 to 0 12/15/25 9 to 0 10/14/25 Consolidated Annexation Hamlin Reserve 0 to 7 12/15/25 0 to 11 8/12/25 Zoning Map Change 3404 Page Road Amendment 7 to 0 12/15/25 9 to 0 10/14/25

In an unincorporated community in North Carolina, two smokestacks reflect on a nearby lake, a dimly lit building standing in the background. The lake is surrounded by an idyllic park and hiking trail, sharply contrasting the streams of toxic coal ash  leaking into groundwater supply.  Four months ago, Duke Energy extended the life of the Belews Creek Power Plant for three to four more years , prolonging a painful legacy of cancer, reproductive failure, and neurological harm. In addition to delaying the retirement of coal plants, Duke Energy also has slashed renewable development  and increased the construction of fossil fuel facilities. Despite recently proposing a rate hike  of 15%, Duke Energy justified their energy plan by modeling cheap prices  for consumers and estimating the reliability of renewable and nonrenewable energy types.  Just like North Carolina’s taxpayers, these estimates are victims of a flawed modeling process, controlled and created by Duke Energy. In the process, millions of Carolinians are deprived of clean energy sources and instead left with mounting energy bills as Duke Energy chooses to align with an increasingly fossil fuel–dependent future.  Modeling Process To begin their analysis, Duke Energy tested the fidelity of different energy sources to see their contribution to the power grid. When inputting reliability scores in the modeling software, Duke Energy operated under the assumption that natural gas and coal energy were perfectly reliable. In a shareholder meeting in July,  Duke Energy admitted that they gave natural gas and coal a 100% reliability score. In reality, coal and natural gas reliability is deficient - outages caused by Winter Storm Elliott in 2023 impacted  more than 300,000 customers across the Carolinas. Current renewable facilities were also   excluded  from reliability calculations, although historical coal and natural gas plants were included. Maria Roumpani, an expert in energy planning  from Stanford University, testified that the 2023 plan, which used similar modeling and assumptions to the one in 2025, created up to a 20% overestimation in nonrenewable energy capacity.  Conversely, Duke Energy downplayed the reliability of cleaner energy. Renewable energy capacity scores were calculated separate from energy storage. For solar energy, that means energy is solely generated when the sun is shining. Only battery storage up to 10 hour s was considered, although existing technologies can store energy for up to 100 hours .   When asked about multi-day storage, Duke Energy argued that   long term battery storage was “lower on the readiness level” and inefficient . However, Duke Energy implemented other developing technologies like small modular nuclear  reactors (SMRs) in their calculations, which are not on the market yet. Futuristic technologies like SMRs make it appear that the 2050 net zero goal will be fulfilled while delaying the building of green energy sources.  Solar energy has especially endured this delay. Duke Energy cut solar energy installations roughly in half compared to the already conservative 2023 plan, shifting an annual goal of 1,600 megawatts (MW) of solar energy per year to just 770 MW after 2026. This is because Duke Energy systematically limited the amount of renewable energy possible under its simulations. In its earlier climate plans, Duke Energy confined the amount of solar energy capacity in its modeling to just 2800  megawatts per year after 2032. Duke Energy has the ability to implement more than two times that amount  compared to similar companies in California and Texas, according to the 2024  expert testimony of Michael Goggin, the Vice President of Grid Strategies and a Harvard graduate. Duke Energy argued limitations on solar were due to cost constraints as well as temporary outages to power lines during construction. Systematic limits inputted into the modeling software allowed Duke Energy cut solar energy roughly in half compared to the already conservative 2023 plan, shifting an annual goal of 1,600 megawatts (MW) of solar energy per year to just  770 MW after 2026. To further inflate renewable energy costs, Duke Energy neglected to consider the full impact of tax credit policy. Duke Energy chose to model with  the old version  of a software called EnCompass, even though tax credits can be more accurately modeled in the new version. When questioned months before releasing the plan, representatives of Duke Energy responded  that they were not “able to evaluate the updated version of EnCompass with enough time to incorporate it [in the plan].” Duke Energy’s subtle combination of numerical inputs fundamentally biased decisionmaking, forcing EnCompass to automatically choose  higher levels of natural gas and coal. EnCompass had no objective carbon reduction criterion, making it unresponsive to long-term energy goals.  Broader Implications The Carolinas are no stranger to the suppression of clean energy technology. In 2024, with the passage of Senate Bill 266 , a targeted 70% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2030 was retracted. Environmental groups have long tried to contest  Duke Energy’s biennial plans, with four experts  testifying just last year about deep methodological flaws. The modeling software Duke uses is extremely time-consuming and expensive, though, so it remains largely inaccessible to nonprofits.  Some alternate models  have been able to use more widely available technologies like Excel, presenting the possibility of investing in wind energy, retiring coal units earlier, and building nuclear and solar power plants earlier in time to reduce emissions 70% by 2032. Nevertheless, a lack of capable technology means these experts’ claims are pushed aside in favor of corporate interests.  The pattern of blurring modeling with shareholder goals echoes in not only Duke Energy’s 2025 plan, it remains a long established practice. Opaque softwares leave consumers with mounting power bills and an increasingly expensive future. Investing in a more resilient energy grid means protecting the independence of utility planning, whether that looks like more energy storage, nuclear, solar, or wind power, depends on the voices of constituents.

Triangle DSA condemns the US abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, First Lady Cilia Flores. As socialists, we can clearly see this for what it is – an imperial ploy to seize oil resources and destabilize the Bolivarian Socialist government of Venezuela. The American oligarchy acted with impunity, laying the precedent that any nation that does not submit to profit-seeking interests will face unjustified military aggression. On Saturday, TDSA members showed up alongside our comrades in PSL, other local organizations, and members of the public to protest this act of terror on civilians in Caracas and the escalation of the US’s ongoing war against Venezuelan sovereignty. The fight for socialism is necessarily international and anti-imperialist. The destructive path of domination and state terror by the US both in Latin America and the Middle East will bring nothing but suffering to innocent people in the global south and increased profits to the ruling class. This is a path to global ruin that can only be brought to an end by socialist revolution. By organizing within the imperial core, we stand with the workers of the world in a shared struggle to end imperialism, neocolonialism, and war, and to establish a new international order based on relations of solidarity, equality, and cooperation. Join DSA in demanding No War with Venezuela!   This statement was first published by Triangle DSA .

On December 12, we held our end of year celebration, where we honored individuals and organizations that have championed our work. With just two people on staff, we couldn’t make the impact we do without so many partners and supporters. Our allies help us keep the momentum going in the struggle for farmworker justice. Here are the “Noise Makers” we honored with our homemade matracas (loud, ratcheted wooden noisemakers typical in Mexico). Organizations honored: Toxic Free NC, Union of Southern Service Workers (USSW), NC Latinx Collaborative Individuals honored: Sylvia Zapata, Susan Alan, Dave Austin, Melissa Harrison, Lori Khamala Looking Ahead We need everyone’s help as we begin to gear up for the coming season. Last year was a year of intense challenges and we are expecting even more in 2026. Here’s some of what we are anticipating, Obviously, immigration issues are a top concern. Even our members, who work in the US on H2A visas, face increased scrutiny, discrimination, and danger at the border, as well as in the communities where they work. We are training our members on how to deal with this situation and we are remaining vigilant. In addition, the Administration’s dramatic slashing of the H2A wage rate - most H2A wages will fall by more than 20% this season, plus additional new cuts to worker pay for “housing”. Naturally, this is of great concern to the workers who have to make big decisions about whether it’s even worth it to make the journey. Stay tuned on this. Read more details about the H2A wage rate cuts in our October 2025 newsletter . With climate change, we expect continued oppressive heat streaks during the summer harvest. We will continue our Collective Responsibility trainings to ensure that our members are educated and prepared to help each other in the fields. This approach was greatly successful last year and we look forward to our Health & Safety Committee members continuing to take leadership in their own and surrounding camps. Finally, last year, we also experienced increased issues of access into camps , with growers threatening, and /or attempting to prevent organizers from visiting workers. We have partnered with the ACLU to respond to one incident with the Rowan County Sheriff’s Department, and it remains to be seen how growers will respond this year. But we know one thing: we’ll be ready! Caring for Injured Workers There are currently two workers staying in the trailer we are using as a temporary shelter: A., whose leg was amputated after a serious work accident, and E., who developed a serious infection due to tobacco pesticides. These workers stayed in North Carolina after the season ended, and they continue to need care. Thanks to a generous donor, they were able to purchase groceries, and pay for their medications. For many cases of injured workers, EFEN often partners with farmworker clinics such as NCFIELD and the NC Farmworkers Project to provide medical services and access different resources such as food pantry and prescription discounts. Thank you NCFIELD and Farmworker Project for your work; we are always grateful for your partnership and support. Just Between Us: Alberto's Song To end on an encouraging note, we want to share a powerful song by our very talented member Alberto, who once toured Europe with a mariachi band.   This is a new version of renowned Mexican Mariachi superstar Vicente Fernandez’ song “Acá entre nos”. The lyrics were written by Student Action with Farmworkers (SAF) summer interns and workers at a labor camp in 2025, and Alberto added his revisions and put it to music. Here are the lyrics in English: To show off to my friends, I told them That in the US, no job could break me. And that I harvested green bills among the furrows. And a few sips of beer were enough To remember a hardworking friend And that his arms were covered in rashes And that he worked in these foreign lands To give his children more opportunities. Just between us I want you to know the truth That among the furrows I gambled My health and well-being, my dignity, my freedom To get ahead and make the best life for my family. Just between us El Futuro Es Nuestro, the place That gave me light and hope When I encountered injustices and deception In the US with a grower and supervisor Who didn't care about my life. Go, Leti! Here comes the grower Speed it up, Maria! Yes, sir! Just between us El Futuro Es Nuestro, the place That gave me light and hope When I encountered injustices and deception In the US with a grower and supervisor Who didn't care about my life. Just between us Among the crops and the tobacco fields I found El Futuro Es Nuestro while working For a bad boss who dismissed my health and dignity And ignored the risks to my life. This article is a condensed version of a newsletter first published by EFEN .

Opening page of the No Practical Alternatives Application for Howard’s Place. It’s unclear why the form is titled “Cape Fear Riparian Buffers.” A process allowing developers to change approved development plans is under scrutiny in Durham. Neuse Riverkeeper Samantha Krop is speaking out about what she calls a loophole in which developers can work around environmental protections with No Practical Alternative Applications. “Essentially, it is a process where developers can apply to impact streams, vegetative, Riparian buffers and other natural resources that would otherwise not be allowed to be impacted according to Durham statute,” she said. “The problem is — and it’s a major problem — this NPAA process happens behind closed doors, without any public notification and does not require approval by Durham’s elected officials.” Samantha was tipped off to the use of NPAAs by a community member who discovered the process through a public records request from the city. Samantha’s own public records request revealed a widely used, but little known, workaround for developers. “I learned that city staff approved 20 NPAAs, which resulted in over 195,000 square feet of stream and buffer impacts, in 2025 alone,” Samantha said. “The only reason I found about that is because of my public records request. Council doesn’t even know that these are necessarily happening.” Samantha also discovered the developer of 86-acre tract of land in the Lick Creek watershed, rezoned by the city last year, currently has an NPAA under review. She and many others spoke out against the rezoning of Howard’s Place, citing the land’s listing on the state’s Natural Heritage Registry and potential impacts to streams in a watershed already overburdened with development and sediment pollution. Part of the developer's application to impact 2.65 acres of buffers in the Howard's Place development. “The developer submitted a request for almost 115,500 square feet of buffer disturbance, which equals about 2.65 acres. That was alarming,” Samantha said. “What really got me upset about this, is that there was a lot of conversation during the rezoning of Howard’s Place. The developer said explicitly in the hearing that they were required to protect water resources. So, it got approved, and months and months later, they came back and asked for an NPAA that would actually disturb those water resources. Developers can get on the dias and assure city council members they’ll follow the rules, and basically, the Council goes ‘OK, well, we don’t have to worry about it,’ then turn around and request all these impacts later. And no one knows about it except the city’s planning department. This is a particularly egregious example, but the city has not approved the Howard’s Place NPAA yet — it’s still under review.” Samantha brought the lack of transparency in the process to the attention of Durham City Council, which in turn asked the planning department to make an NPAA presentation at the Council’s Feb. 5 work session. “We’re asking for more public transparency in the process, for the city to make a public notification system so that people who want to know what NPAAs have been submitted for which properties can find out easily, without making a public records request,” she said. Samantha is encouraging Durham residents to watch or attend the Durham City Council work session on Feb. 5 at 1 p.m. in the Committee Room at 101 City Hall Plaza, and comment on the NPAA process. Find out more here. Like the work your Riverkeeper is doing to protect your waterways? We love it! Donate today to support her work! This article was first published by Sound Rivers .

On Jan. 23, around 30 protestors gathered on the sidewalk in front of Gateway Women’s Care on Capitol Street in northern Durham. The event was organized by Triangle Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) as part of its Abort Fake Clinics campaign. Gateway bills itself as a provider of “free, confidential pregnancy and sexual health services,” but it is a type of anti-abortion religious organization often called a crisis pregnancy center, or CPC. The Durham location is not a licensed medical facility, according to a registry maintained by the state’s Division of Health Service Regulation [ 1 ]. CPCs frequently locate near reproductive healthcare clinics. For example, Gateway in Durham is across the street from a Duke Health OBGYN. The anti-abortion center offers procedures such as an “abortion pill reversal”, which the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has called “unproven and unethical” [ 2 ]. The Gateway location in Durham rents its building, and the Abort Fake Clinics campaign will request that the landlord cancel the lease. The same tactic successfully closed a Gateway in Raleigh in March 2025. The landlord did not renew the lease of the CPC after a two-year effort by the Abort Fake Clinics campaign, formerly called the Socialist Feminist Working Group [ 3 ]. Wendy Bonano is the executive director of Gateway Women's Health. In a 2023 interview, she stated that her organization creates a “process to slow down their rush to the abortion clinic” [ 4 ]. To that end, anti-abortion centers often “delay, reschedule and even lie to women until it’s too late into the pregnancy for them to get an abortion”, according to Cardinal and Pine  [ 5 ]. The GOP-controlled state legislature subsidized CPCs with more than $12 million in 2023, with the amount decreasing slightly since then. Image credit: The Assembly The Jan. 23 protest involved participants chatting on the sidewalk, drinking coffee and hot chocolate, and waving signs at passersby. Slogans on posters included “unregulated, unlicensed, and unethical”, “abortion bans are against my religion”, and “fund abortion, not fake clinics”. Organizers talked to other businesses in the medical plaza to increase awareness of Gateway’s misleading and unethical practices. Activists introduced themselves to front desk staff and gave them fliers, or left literature tucked in doorways at closed clinics. The Friday event drew interest from local politicians. Durham County Commissioner Nida Allam, currently running for Congress, waved a sign that said “ exposefakeclinics.com ”. Andrea Cazales, a NICU nurse and city council candidate in the last election cycle, held a poster that said, “Not Bound by HIPAA”. Gateway and other CPCs operate largely without governmental oversight. Since many are not licensed medical facilities, they are exempt from regulatory standards for healthcare centers. CPCs are not bound by the federal patient privacy laws outlined in HIPAA, so patient information does not have to be kept confidential. Triangle pro-choice groups have started cooperating to campaign against anti-abortion centers like Gateway Women's Health. The network includes Chapel Hill National Organization for Women (NOW), League of Women Voters of Orange, Durham, and Chatham Counties (LWVODC), Interfaith Voices for Reproductive Freedom (IVRF), Triangle DSA, Planned Parenthood Votes! South Atlantic, Pro-Choice NC, and Carolina Abortion Fund. The coalition is hosting a symposium  on reproductive healthcare and CPCs on Saturday, Feb. 7 in Chapel Hill.  Work Cited Licensed Facilities . NC DHSR. https://info.ncdhhs.gov/dhsr/reports.htm Medication abortion “reversal” is not supported by science . American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. http://www.acog.org/advocacy/facts-are-important/medication-abortion-reversal-is-not-supported-by-science Gateway Women’s Care, Anti-Abortion Center in Raleigh, shuts doors after picketing by community organizers. (2025, May 22). Durham Dispatch . https://www.durhamdispatch.com/post/gateway-womens-care-anti-abortion-center-in-raleigh-closes-after-picketing-by-community-organizers What a pregnancy resource center really looks like . (2024, November 20). North Carolina Family Policy Council. http://www.ncfamily.org/what-a-pregnancy-resource-center-really-looks-like NC budget gives $20 million to “Clinics” that lie to women about abortion. (2023, September 26). Cardinal & Pine . https://cardinalpine.com/2023/09/26/nc-budget-gives-20-million-to-clinics-that-lie-to-women-about-abortion

Over the past several years, universities in the UNC system have become increasingly reliant on adjunct faculty — ​​part-time, non-tenure-track instructors who are hired on a contractual basis to teach specific courses. Since 2002, the number of part-time professors across the UNC system has increased by over 600%, while the number of full-time tenured professors has only increased by 30%, full-time tenure-track by 13% and full-time non-tenure-track by 121%, according to data from the American Association of University Professors, a union and membership association of faculty and other academic professionals that was established to define the standards and policies for the profession.  A spokesperson for the UNC system said they do not keep centralized data on numbers of adjuncts teaching systemwide and referred inquiries to individual campuses. Within the UNC system — comprised of 16 universities — each school uses these types of professors differently. While bigger schools, like UNC-Chapel Hill, have certain courses that have over three-quarters of sections taught by adjuncts, smaller schools like UNC Asheville have less than 10% of their total instructional workforce occupied by the part-time professors. In 2024, UNCA went through a structural budget deficit, forcing the school to greatly reduce its reliance on adjunct professors. While five years ago the school might have been using adjuncts more extensively, within the past two years, that rate has decreased. They are typically only used at the Western North Carolina institution when there is a great need. “We use adjuncts strategically,” UNCA Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, Yvonne Villanueva-Russell, said. “So there are a number of experts that live in the region, and we want to utilize their expertise as a value add to our curriculum. So sometimes [we] employ an adjunct who can teach a class on business law or an ensemble on Afro-music, which is beyond the expertise or the capacity of our faculty. Sometimes an adjunct really adds something to the curriculum, and so I think it’s a really smart use to expand your curriculum without making a long-term investment in somebody.” Utilizing individuals who have specific expertise is a common reason for hiring adjuncts, and one that can satisfy a short-term need. This strategy allows for more niche courses, but doesn’t necessarily lend a hand to long-term positions, as these kinds of courses are not typically offered over several semesters. “UNC Charlotte leverages the expertise of adjunct faculty to complement the work of our full-time faculty,” Buffie Stephens, director of Media Relations at UNCC, said. “As North Carolina’s urban research university and Charlotte’s only R1 institution, we benefit from our location in the Charlotte region by drawing on the valuable experience of leaders across the community, including business, non-profit, arts, education, healthcare and more, who serve as adjuncts.” Though it isn’t a significant increase, the number of adjunct faculty at UNCC has risen over the past five years, with an average 2.1% increase per semester, while full-time employees have seen an average 0.6% increase. Villanueva-Russell also said that sometimes, when classes are in high demand, like a first-year English class or an introductory Spanish course, more professors are needed, making adjuncts come into play more. This sentiment of supply and demand is a large force behind UNC-CH’s use of adjuncts, as well.  The UNC Hussman School of Journalism and Media has about 1,200 undergraduate students — a number that is continually rising. Each of these students is required to take two specific courses in the school to begin their degree, and about 80% of those classes are taught by adjuncts, according to Livis Freeman, the assistant dean for course management and staffing. “Those are skills courses, so you can only have 20 students per course,” Freeman said. “We can’t just make bigger courses and use fewer instructors, so we couldn’t survive without [adjuncts].” Freeman started as an adjunct instructor at UNC-CH in 2014 before moving through the ranks to obtain the position he has now. However, while this career growth worked for Freeman, this pathway isn’t as common or easy for others. Wade Maki, the faculty assembly chair of the UNC System and a UNC Greensboro professor, said that many adjunct professors often teach courses at several institutions in an attempt to earn enough money for a full-time job when specific universities won’t offer them. Maki said that while universities have grown in student populations, budgets have not kept pace. He said that there has been less growth in tenure lines and more growth in two places: non-tenure track full-time professors and adjuncts. A tenure line for a professor refers to a permanent, full-time faculty position that is granted after an individual has worked for several years in a probationary role. Tenure is an open-ended role that provides job security, preventing possible dismissal, making it a highly coveted position. “Sometimes it’s because that person is just the right expert for a class that no one else is available to teach, but often the phrase that gets used is [that] there’s a ‘stable of adjuncts,’ where you’ll have a few full-time tenured people, a few full-time non-tenured people, and then you’ll have a whole bunch of adjuncts to cover an entire department’s worth of courses,” Maki said. “So all three of those [types of professors] are utilized to make the budgets work while still offering all of the courses that need to be offered.” Most adjuncts are typically paid out of funds that would have been given for a full-time position, but by breaking up that money amongst several individuals, rather than consolidating it in one place, more people can be hired. Glenn Colby, senior research officer for the AAUP, said that a common issue is that administrative salaries are taking money away from what could be allocated to faculty. He said that a big issue is the corporatization of higher education, in general, making schools feel as though they need to hire more administrators who can bring in more money for the institution, rather than spending money on full-time professors who can actually expand the educational welfare of the school. “If there are 500 administrators in a system, the presidential salaries are not what’s causing the problem; it’s the fact that there are so many other administrators and their pay might be increasing as well,” he said. “So the administration will claim that it can’t afford to create or even maintain tenure line positions, and you have to ask: Well, why is it that they can afford to pay themselves more money?” Colby said that through his work, over time, he has seen administrative salaries continue to increase at a greater rate than faculty salaries, and the UNC system is no exception. In the past 13 years, according to AAUP data, the money spent by UNC-CH on management employees has increased by about 50%, whereas the money spent on faculty has gone up by about 30%. “So they’re paying non-faculty, especially managers, higher and higher wages,” Colby said. “And they’re probably using that to say, ‘well, we can’t afford to hire more full-time people,’ so they’ll hire adjuncts, and that’s the story. It’s a familiar story.” It is clear that money is often the driving factor behind the allocation of teaching positions, and thus, it is a big factor in the increased use of adjunct professors, especially at a school like UNC-CH, where, though they pay these individuals around $6,000 per course, they don’t receive as many benefits as full-time individuals. “You often pay to park, you are often not given any travel or equipment funding, you are just a hired gun to teach a class,” Maki said. “And it also means, if somebody doesn’t like you or your class, whether that’s students or other faculty, that can be the end of your employment. And it’s not like you get fired, you simply don’t get offered another course.” This tactic can be beneficial for universities, but not always for the professors themselves, or even the students.  While it’s not always the case, if an individual is teaching at numerous institutions or working another job to supplement their income, they can’t provide as much one-on-one focus for students as full-time professors can. At UNC-CH, university enrollment has increased by around 11% from 2014 to 2024, according to the UNC-CH Enrollment Planning Working Group Report. So while university populations nationwide are growing and more faculty are needed, using more part-time professors is likely not the most beneficial solution. But as universities become more focused on bringing in as much money as possible, it’s a trend that will likely continue, according to Maki. “Nationally, what you’ll find is [that] adjuncts have been a growing percentage overall, because universities grew as we moved from a society where only a few people went to college to where half or more than half go to college,” he said. “To support that growth, adjuncts have been the people filling that gap.” This article was first published by UNC Media Hub .

Between July and September 2025, U.S. Rep. Valerie Foushee’s reelection campaign drew from a donor base that included technology, weapons, pharmaceutical and fossil fuel corporations. Many of the companies are regulated by Foushee’s congressional committees or subcommittees. Her PAC, Foushee for Congress, was supported by many individuals of wealth and influence in North Carolina’s Triangle region. The typical third-quarter donor had some of the following characteristics: Chapel Hill resident, academic leader, business owner, or financial sector executive. This article is based on data from the Federal Election Commission [ 1 ]. Only corporations and individuals who donated $500 or more to Foushee are examined in detail. Entergy Corp., a fossil fuel company, gave $1,000 to Foushee for Congress in July 2025. Three-quarters of Entergy’s owned or leased generation capacity comes from fracked gas, coal, or oil [ 2, pg. 12 ]. The utility company serves Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. Entergy does not operate in the 4 th District, or elsewhere in North Carolina.  Foushee sits on the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials, which sets safety standards for Entergy’s thousands of miles of fracked gas pipelines. She also sits on the Subcommittee on Energy, which has jurisdiction over fossil fuel research and development. In August 2025, Foushee received a $500 individual donation from Shawna Williams. Based in Greensboro, Williams is a top lobbyist for Reynolds American Inc., the second-largest U.S. tobacco company. The company owns brands such as Camel, American Spirit, and Lucky Strike. Williams is also a member of the University of North Carolina at Greensboro Board of Visitors. Many of Foushee’s third-quarter donors hold positions of academic leadership. Emily Dickens and Courtney Crowder are on the North Carolina Central University Board of Trustees. Sallie Shuping-Russell was on the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Board of Trustees. Radharani Dasi is on the school board in Chapel Hill and Carrboro. Five other Q3 donors who gave $500 or more are university professors. Caterpillar Inc. was Foushee’s most generous corporate donor in this period, giving $2,500 in September 2025. The company is best known for selling heavy construction equipment. Caterpillar is a prominent target of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement because of the company’s D9 armored bulldozer. The D9 is frequently used by the Israeli military to demolish Palestinian homes and infrastructure. Caterpillar has administrative offices and manufacturing facilities in the Triangle [ 3 ].   In October 2025, Indyweek positively reviewed a play called “My Name is Rachel Corrie” at the Burning Coal Theatre in Raleigh [ 4 ]. Corrie was a U.S. peace activist killed by the Israeli military in 2003. She was protecting a Palestinian home in the Gaza Strip when a D9 bulldozer saw her, crushed her, then reversed over her. Other defense contractors that donated to Foushee in the third quarter include Honeywell International Inc., Northrop Grumman Corp., Raytheon Technologies Corp., General Dynamics Corp., and Lockheed Martin Corp.   Sallie Shuping-Russell gave $1,000 to Foushee’s campaign in July 2025. Shuping-Russell comes from the power elite of Orange County, like many of Foushee's donors in the third quarter. She was a member of the UNC Chapel Hill board of trustees, co-founder of the Duke University Management Company (DUMAC, Inc.) cofounder, and a BlackRock Inc. managing director. With over   $10 trillion in assets under management, BlackRock is the world's largest asset management company. Six other Q3 donors have strong links to the financial sector as banking executives, bank board members, asset managers, major investors, etc.   Meta Platforms Inc., the parent company of Facebook, donated $1,000 to Foushee for Congress. The corporation is controlled by Mark Zuckerberg, a leading U.S. oligarch. His net worth is estimated at $220 billion by Bloomberg . Zuckerberg has strong ties to the second Trump administration. The president’s inaugural fund received $1 million from Meta, more than from any other corporation. Meta has complied with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement requests to remove content that document the agency’s human rights abuses [ 5 ].   Zuckerberg has announced plans to spend $600 billion on an enormous network of energy-guzzling data centers through 2028 [ 6 ]. To gain access and cooperation from the government, Meta has hired former Trump advisors such as Dina McCormick. Foushee was appointed as co-chair of the House Democratic Commission on Artificial Intelligence despite taking donations from Meta, Google, Garmin Ltd., and other technology companies.   In September 2025, David Steinglass gave $1,000 to Foushee. Steinglass is a co-founder of Northlane Capital Partners, a Maryland private equity firm. He and his wife have given more than $5 million to support Democratic political causes. Through the Patriots Run Project, Steinglass has engaged in the risky practice of donating to far-right candidates in hopes of providing easier opponents for Democratic candidates in the general election. One of these candidates was Thomas Leager, whose close associates included men charged in the 2020 scheme to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.   Work Cited   Foushee for Congress . (n.d.). FEC.gov . https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/?committee_id=C00794727&two_year_transaction_period=2026&data_type=processed Energy for a Better Future - 2024 Performance Report. (2024). Entergy .  https://www.entergy.com/wp-content/uploads/08/2024-Performance-Report.pdf Advanced Manufacturing - Company Highlight - Caterpillar . (2026). Research Triangle Regional Partnership.  https://researchtriangle.org/industries/advanced-manufacturing/#:~:text=Company%20Highlight-,Caterpillar,nearby%20community%20colleges%20and%20universities Edwards, Sarah (2025, October 13).  Burning Coal Theatre produces powerful series of “My name is Rachel Corrie” readings across ten months . INDY Week.  https://indyweek.com/news/culture/burning-coal-theatre-my-name-is-rachel-corrie/ Meta Removes Facebook Group That Shared Information on ICE Agents. (2025, October 15).  New York Times .  https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/15/technology/meta-removes-ice-facebook-page.html Meta plans $600 billion US spend as AI data centers expand. (2025, November 7).  Reuters .  https://www.reuters.com/business/meta-plans-600-billion-us-spend-ai-data-centers-expand-2025-11-07/

Sheraton Imperial Hotel @ RTP. Image credit: Discover Durham On Jan. 9, House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Rep. Valerie Foushee, and Rep. Deborah Ross hosted a fundraiser for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), the party’s congressional campaign arm [ 1 ]. The event was held at the Sheraton Imperial Hotel in Research Triangle Park. Rep. Foushee is facing a competitive primary against Durham County Commissioner Nida Allam. Tickets cost between $1,000 and $44,300, the maximum donation that can be given to a party committee's general fund . The tiers were: General Reception Level: $1,000 for general admission $2,500 for “Friend” $5,000 for “Supporter” VIP Reception Levels: $10,000 for “Chairwoman’s Council” $25,000 for “Host” $44,300 for “Leader’s Circle” At DCCC fundraisers, more expensive tickets typically provide greater access to top politicians and strategists.  A “Chairwoman Council” ticket includes an invitation to the “Weekend and Issues Conference” hosted by DCCC Chair Suzan DelBene in Seattle in March 2026, plus future regional events. Tickets in the “Leader’s Circle” come with access to DCCC events nationwide, an invitation to the “Leader’s Circle Issues Conference and Weekend” with Leader Jeffries in Torrey Pines in August 2026, and access to DCCC strategy meetings. “Leader’s Circle” donors can also contribute to the DCCC Legal Fund, which supports voting rights and redistricting efforts, or the Building Fund, which funds infrastructure and staff in key races. Those who give over $150,000 are welcomed into the Jeffries150 Club, while donors who reach the limit of $310,000 for all party committee accounts are welcomed into the Jeffries300 Club. Though officially a fundraiser for the DCCC, the Jan. 9 event gave Rep. Foushee and Rep. Ross a chance to connect with the party's national donor network. DCCC fundraisers can be used to informally “push” donations to vulnerable or favored incumbents. In a rematch of her 2022 primary, Rep. Foushee will face Nida Allam in the Democratic primary. Allam has been endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders, the Working Families Party, Sunrise Movement, and several other progressive groups. She refuses to accept corporate PAC money. Foushee has accepted donations from corporate PACs in various industries including weapons, railroads, pharmaceuticals, and fossil fuels [ 2 ]. In the 2022 race, Rep. Foushee was criticized for benefiting from millions in outside spending by pro-Israel groups and a PAC funded by cryptocurrency billionare Sam Bankman-Fried, who is now imprisoned for fraud. The contest became the most expensive Democratic primary in state history. Rep. Foushee said in Aug. 2025 that she would refuse donations from AIPAC. The shift followed the global outcry against the Israeli genocide of Palestinian people in Gaza. Without such support, she needs to find other donors to compete against Allam. The Jan. 9 fundraiser for the DCCC could assist Rep. Foushee by connecting her with a wider donor network.